Choosing the Plugin Type
How to Choose the Base Contract for Your Plugin
Although it is not mandatory to choose one of our interfaces as the base contracts for your plugins, we do offer some options for you to inherit from and speed up development.
The needs of your plugin determine the type of plugin you may want to choose. This is based on:
- the need for a plugin's upgradeability
- whether you need it deployed by a specific deployment method
- whether you need it to be compatible with meta transactions
In this regard, we provide 3 options for base contracts you can choose from:
Pluginfor instantiation vianewPluginClonesfor minimal proxy pattern (ERC-1167) deploymentPluginUUPSUpgradeablefor UUPS pattern (ERC-1822) deployment
Let's take a look at what this means for you.
Upgradeability & Deployment
Upgradeability and the deployment method of a plugin contract go hand in hand. The motivation behind upgrading smart contracts is nicely summarized by OpenZeppelin:
Smart contracts in Ethereum are immutable by default. Once you create them there is no way to alter them, effectively acting as an unbreakable contract among participants.
However, for some scenarios, it is desirable to be able to modify them [...]
- to fix a bug [...],
- to add additional features, or simply to
- change the rules enforced by it.
Here’s what you’d need to do to fix a bug in a contract you cannot upgrade:
- Deploy a new version of the contract
- Manually migrate all state from the old one contract to the new one (which can be very expensive in terms of gas fees!)
- Update all contracts that interacted with the old contract to use the address of the new one
- Reach out to all your users and convince them to start using the new deployment (and handle both contracts being used simultaneously, as users are slow to migrate
Some key things to keep in mind:
- With upgradeable smart contracts, you can modify their code while keep using or even extending the storage (see the guide Writing Upgradeable Contracts by OpenZeppelin).
- To enable upgradeable smart contracts (as well as cheap contract clones), the proxy pattern is used.
- Depending on your upgradeability requirements and the deployment method you choose, you can also greatly reduce the gas costs to distribute your plugin. However, the upgradeability and deployment method can introduce caveats during the plugin setup, especially when updating from an older version to a new one.
The following table compares the different deployment methods with their benefits and drawbacks:
new Instantiation | Minimal Proxy (Clones) | Transparent Proxy | UUPS Proxy | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| upgradeability | no | no | yes | yes |
| gas costs | high | very low | moderate | low |
| difficulty | low | low | high | high |
Accordingly, we recommend to use minimal proxies (ERC-1167) for non-upgradeable and UUPS proxies (1822) for upgradeable plugin. To help you with developing and deploying your plugin within the Aragon infrastructure, we provide the following implementation that you can inherit from:
Pluginfor instantiation vianewPluginClonesfor minimal proxy pattern (ERC-1167) deploymentPluginUUPSUpgradeablefor UUPS pattern (ERC-1822) deployment
Caveats of Non-upgradeable Plugins
Aragon plugins using the non-upgradeable smart contracts bases (Plugin, PluginCloneable) can be cheap to deploy (i.e., using clones) but cannot be updated.
Updating, in distinction from upgrading, will call Aragon OSx' internal process for switching from an older plugin version to a newer one.
To switch from an older version of a non-upgradeable contract to a newer one, the underlying contract has to be replaced. In consequence, the state of the older version is not available in the new version anymore, unless it is migrated or has been made publicly accessible in the old version through getter functions.
